I move the amendment to the Schedule:—
To delete Reference No. 8 and all references thereto in columns 2, 3, and 4.
I desire to make some remarks in regard to Reference No. 8—variation of duty on certain surface-glazed clay tiles. A duty was imposed to the extent of 50 per cent., and this duty now is an increase on the former duty. I think that the Minister scarcely realises what those new duties amount to. The duty on 3×3 tiles is 335 per cent. and the duty on 4×2 tiles is 375 per cent. We could all approve of the present producers in this country getting adequate protection for their goods, and in fact being encouraged to produce a greater variety of goods, but the manufacture of those glazed tiles is a highly specialised matter. The fact that a factory may be able to produce one set of tiles satisfactorily does not mean that another set may be produced. Another point is that there are special tiles which must be procured in any case from the other side, and I should like to suggest to the Minister that it is absurd to put a duty of over 300 per cent. on tiles which the present factory cannot produce, or in regard to which the deliveries are so much behind as practically to mean that there is no source of supply.
I think the Minister would not wish for that. There are people who have these 6×6 tiles on order for five months, and others have been waiting four months for 4×4 tiles to make surrounds needed in a housing scheme. I am sure the Minister would not approve of that delay. I should like if he would look into the question of the duty and the delay. I do not wish to let anybody get in goods that are produced by the present factory if they can be delivered in a reasonable time. The Minister will find that there is plenty of machinery for consulting those who supply the goods, and if that is done, and if it is found that there is unreasonable delay, some provision ought to be made temporarily, at any rate, to allow in certain classes of tiles.
